Support Our Troops--FOR REAL!!!

Obama/Webb

Parrots for Obama: Yes We Can

http://www.silencedmajority.blogs.com

NMP,

Too cute! You come up with the cutest things!

TSP
I had better put that on http://www.baracklikeme.blogspot.com - it will blow Nyc's mind (it's his blog.) We are trying to make it positive Obama - put the anti stuff about others elsewhere. He used to be a Reagan Republican Marine!

This goes with the picture - Keith Olbermann

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/24765753#24765302

Supply fears send oil past $135 a barrel
Global demand and an ever weakening U.S. dollar drive futures up

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12400801

Didja ever think you'd see the day when the GOP would adore Hillary Clinton?

She's doing great work for them, and hints that she may continue that work right on through to the convention in August.

Canary in a Coalmine

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq who has been nominated to head American forces in the Middle East, said Thursday he hopes to make recommendations for further troop reductions in Iraq before he moves to his new post in September.

Petraeus, who is nominated to head the U.S. Central Command in the Middle East, and Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, who has been tapped to fill Petraeus' position in Iraq, testified before the Senate Armed Services Committee on their nominations. Odierno is currently the No. 2 U.S. commander in Iraq.

"I will be able to make recommendations at that time [September] for some further reductions," Petraeus said. "I don't want to imply that means a BCT [brigade combat team] or major combat formation, although it could.

more...
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/22/petraeus.senate.hearings/index.html

Gee friggin willikers, a troop reduction JUST in time for the election.

Who woulda thunked it?

In Rove We Wade

Speak of the devil...

House subpoenas former Bush aide Karl Rove
Called to testify at inquiry on political meddling at Justice Department

WASHINGTON (AP) - The House Judiciary Committee on Thursday subpoenaed former White House top political adviser Karl Rove to testify about whether the White House improperly meddled with the Justice Department.

Accusations of politics influencing decisions at the department led to last year's resignation of former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.

The subpoena issued Thursday orders Rove to testify before the House panel on July 10. He is expected to face questions about the White House's role in firing nine U.S. attorneys in 2006 and the prosecution of former Gov. Don Siegelman of Alabama, a Democrat.

more...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24778787/

Not to be an upper around here but gas was over 4.00/gallon for us this week. I'm so sickened by it, I could puke.

Also, the sleesy gas execs practically threatened Congress to raise prices even more if they create any windfall profit laws. The only other thing they demand is for Congress to open the oceans, the Anwar, and all the exploration they want. If you didn't hear it, you should. Unfortunately, I'm not grabbing links today. (I'm sort of ill.)

Obama Launching Tour Of Purple States Next Week

By Greg Sargent - May 22, 2008, 6:15PM

In a sign that Obama is shifting more aggressively into general election mode, the Illinois Senator will undertake a tour of three purple states -- New Mexico, Nevada, and Colorado -- on the first three days of next week, I've learned from a senior Obama campaign aide.

Obama will visit the Las Cruces area on Monday, the Las Vegas area on Tuesday, and and the Denver area on Wednesday, the Obama aide confirms.

The tour will draw attention to three states that Camp Obama has argued he can run well in this fall -- an assertion that's key to deflecting Hillary's case to super-delegates that she's more electable in a general election.

More to the point, it will continue to broadcast the signal -- as have his visits to other general election states -- that the Obama camp views the primary as effectively over and that his showdown with McCain has begun in earnest.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/05/obama_launching_tour_of_purple.php

Did the Vietnamese 'waterboard' our prisnors of war? Seriously, did they?

What was their preffered method of 'breaking' one of our soldiers?

I tell you why I am asking. I had a thought the other day, yes, it was painful, but I now can not get the idea out of my head.

I read someone saying how Mumbles McCrazy 'never broke' as a captive. And I hear and have heard that line a lot for all my life.

How is it possible he never broke when our own CIA can break someone with a waterboard in less than 2 minutes...?

Remember the CIA agent talking about Khalid Sheikh Mohammed... how he was just AMAZED that he could hold out for 2 minutes? US GIs being tortured by Nazis never lasted more than 4 days, the Japanese broke them even faster.

If John MvcCain was tortured, and I have no doubt he was, but if he was tortured for YEARS, how likely is it he 'never broke'..?

Were the Vietnamese just not very good at torture?

Yeah, I know, taboo, but, now it bugs me.

Did John McCain break under torture? And if he did, how could we ever be assured he was ever fully put back together?

Who said that? We don't need someone with PTSD with his finger on the button? I mean, my God, but... if he was broken, then the questions become way more important than wether or not it is 'proper' to discuss it.

I am not saying he is not a 'hero' I am saying even heros can be broken. And if he is basing his military/policy 'expertise' on his experience as a captive in a war, then it seems like that should be the first question asked.

'How long did it take him to break? And what did he give up?'

Unless the Vietnamese just were crappy at torture, it is almost certain he was broken.

Vietnam Veterans Against McCain

US Documents pertaining to McCain’s COLLABORATIONS with the CommunistThis document is a transcript of a Hanoi correspondent broadcast to Cuba quoting newly captured POW John McCain detailing U.S. military information about ...

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/cin_declassified_landing.htm

Um Rossi. Thanks. I think.

And. Ummm.

Holy freaking cow!

I am scared to read them now. I thought I wanted to know, but, now I just think I may throw up.

I don't want McCain for President but I don't really want him Swiftboated either. Poor old man needs to go to bed. Hillary needs to go back to the Senate, relax a little. The race is closer than the McCain/Huckabee was and Huckabee even stayed in way too long. This is painful. Please let the DNC Rules Committee be sane on 5/31 and GOTV for Obama in MT, SD & Puerto Rico. I will donate and call.

Here is more on the racism issue. This comes from Al Jazeera because I agree with Markos that is was too "explosive" of material for American press to touch.

Jim Webb's opinion on the issue (above):
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/politicalinsider/entries/2008/05/21/jim_webb_on_the_coolness_of_wo.html
I respect him - interesting to read this at this time. I'm alot Irish.

Swiftboating requires a lie to replace the truth.

If what Rossi just posted is true, it is not swiftboating, it is discussing the facts, and BY GOD if he wants to be president of this nation he better be willing to face the facts.

Most US Citizens alive today do not have a thing to do with Vietnam. And we certainly do not owe it to anyone to continue the absurd justifications and lies that somehow led prior generations to killing 3 million Vietnamese for no apparent reason at all.

John Kerry and McCain both served their country, but Kerry himself was ineffective at confronting the swiftboaters. He did not want to start some big 'Vietnam Argument', and his reluctance to fully confront it was his doom.

And now, because of it, we are what? Going to pretend John McCains war record is offlimits? Oh I can not even count the number of ways I think that is a bad idea. He can not use it as a magic shield to deflect, yet we are in turn not suppossed to examine it? That is the source of his 'expert views' yet they are off limits for us to question the foundations of. No way.

AND most certainly if what Rossi posted is true then MY GOD,... we are talking about giving a NUCLEAR EMPIRE to a torture victim! One who gave up info to 'the enemy' and was used as a PR prop.

This is not a polite poetry, this is politics. He was used as Vietcong PROPAGANDA. This is not wether or not John Kerry bled when he was wounded, THIS is not anything like swiftboating.

If John McCain thinks anyone owes him the benefit of the doubt he is sadly mistaken. He has lied too much about too many other things. And, again, his entire image is based on this 'hero' crap, so he can either make that jive with the FACTS or he can go home and suffer his old wounds in private.

BTW, what was him and John Kerry killing Vietnamese people for again in the first place? Cause I forget.

I am sick of this 'hero worship' culture. Firemen, now THAT is a a bunch of certified HEROS. How killing a bunch of people for lies producs HEROS is totally freaking beyond me anymore.

Are McCain's handlers playing the wrong card?

By David H. Hackworth
January 25, 2000

http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/cin_hacker_2.htm

We live in a time of war crimes. Brazen, open, bold, unapologetic war crimes.

The least we can do is be freaking honest about PRIOR war crimes We committed.

The generations that came after have been fed so many lies and so much straight out propaganda about Vietnam it is literally A JOKE to us.

Imagine, 58,000 of my country's soldiers killed 3 million Vietnamese... FOR ME! For my freedom, for MY protection. All for little ol' me!

And I am expected to be sooo grateful for it, digging any deeper makes me ungrateful and unamerican.

A joke. A bad joke that is so stupid it has become toxic. So toxic, the generations born into the gore and filth of it have developed immunity to it.

Maybe had this all been openly talked about back then, we never would have wound up here, still desperately needing to have this conversation.

While I am at it, let's go ahead and just say it... the reason WHY John Kerry could not counter the swiftboaters.

Because he did not want to be forced into a public argument where he would have to say the whole war was a war crime, and he was involved with it, in it...whatever. He did not want to be cornered on Iraq, for the exact same reasons. That is why he could not fight them back.

We all know it, we all believe it, we all see it... yet no one is suppossed to SAY IT, because that is what is rude.

Not war crimes, that is ok, the DISCUSSION of it is repulsive. Forbidden, taboo.

Well, I say... To hell with that.

Could you imagine anyone in politics who fought in Vietnam standing up and saying 'Vietnam, like Iraq, was in of itself a literal war crime. One in which I personally participated in and was awarded medals for.'

'Btw... Support Our Troops!'

That would make 'Goddamn America!' clips look like any other sunday.

McCain Questions Obama's Lack Of Military Service
By Greg Sargent - May 22, 2008, 3:42PM
This is noteworthy: John McCain is now officially making a campaign issue of Obama's lack of military service.

On the Senate floor today, Obama hit McCain for not supporting Webb's 21st Century G.I. bill. In response, McCain released a lengthy statement. Here's the key line, buried in the middle of it:

I take a backseat to no one in my affection, respect and devotion to veterans. And I will not accept from Senator Obama, who did not feel it was his responsibility to serve our country in uniform, any lectures on my regard for those who did.

McCain is constantly said by pundits to be reluctant to bring up his Vietnam experiences in a political context. But this is now the third day in a row he's done this.

Yesterday and the day before he made oblique, but obvious, references to his torture in captivity. And today -- to my knowledge for the first time -- McCain directly attacked Obama for his lack of military service.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/05/mccain_questions_obamas_lack_o.php

So lemme get this straight Senator McCain, if someone does not "choose" to serve in the military, which by the way in this country is a CHOICE not an obligation or requirement, than that person and the millions of others like them a) show a lack of responsibility and b)should have no say or opinion on anything related to the military or how OUR government "chooses" to treat those who DO serve in the military?

You sir, are one twisted f*ck.

Christy,

I agree with most of what you are saying. And, although I don't want to sound harsh, this is OUR COUNTRY we are fighting for, and if John McCain broke and helped the enemy (I have heard other reports of him doing so, but don't have a link right now, so don't quote me. I will find a link this weekend. (Four days off, WOO HOO.)
Rossi's links look pretty good. Let us make an effort this weekend to research how much of a part McCain had in aiding the enemy. I have heard it was quite a bit and that he got favors for doing so. So, I assume that since he was held captive people will excuse him (not bad or good. Which brings me back to M.O. and McCains tactics of trying to belittle Obama.I don't trust him, and I definitely to lie and sell himself out to win this election. The writing is on the wall.....McCain is not to be trusted, IMO.He has a temper. He vascillates between hugging Bush (to get the supporters of the right wing,) to attacks on Bush's associatin with the war in Iraq. I know, he is supported , and it sounds like Rovaint tacitcs
and IT IS!!!

We have to fight back, no holds barred, and it's not taboo to wonder about such things as whether of not he broke. You know the

I personally, after seeing the MO of the Rovian campaign tactics, know that Rove taught everyone to go after the opponents strongest and most true and therefore threatening points of service and of character, trying to "twist" the electorates thinking from admiration to disdane. I don't believe in dirty politics. But, this election is a step to prevent revolution in this country, and as long as we are not lying, I think we should tell the truth about whether or not McCain broke, and the part he played to help the enemy at that point. There is no shame in breaking. There is shame about trying to hide it, while putting your opponent down and swiftboating him. And that is what McCain is trying to do to Obama. Dems are TOO NICE for their own good. We should also tell the truth about the destrucive votes MCain has cast. I'm sorry, but I see MCain, although being a maverick, flip flop and kiss the ring.

May 23, 2008 2:53 AM
Christy said:

Yesterday and the day before he made oblique, but obvious, references to his torture in captivity. And today -- to my knowledge for the first time -- McCain directly attacked Obama for his lack of military service.
McCain Questions Obama's Lack Of Military Service
May 23, 2008 5:50 AM

monkey said:

So lemme get this straight Senator McCain, if someone does not "choose" to serve in the military, which by the way in this country is a CHOICE not an obligation or requirement, than that person and the millions of others like them a) show a lack of responsibility and b)should have no say or opinion on anything related to the military or how OUR government "chooses" to treat those who DO serve in the military?

You sir, are one twisted f*ck.

sparrow said:

There is a website that lists the number of Democratic Veterans and Republican veterans. More Democrats have served in the military than republicans. Also, there is colleges full of republican 'chicken-hawks' who claim that they support the war but they also demand that others go fight it for them.

I hope someone wipes McCain's face in those facts. Because when he disses people who don't serve, then he's dissing a whole generation of people who didn't have to enlist because our wiser presidents didn't provoke unnecessary wars.

Christy,

I agree with a few things that you're saying. (Reading up the thread.)

1. McCain was used for propaganda and he broke. His record on that is fair game for the election. I don't think it's swiftboating if they're saying that McCain gave away US secrets under torture and/or was used for propaganda. However, I also think it is a very thin line between pushing out that story and 'attacking' a hero.

2. The bigger attack against McCain should be his behavior when he returned home. He dumped his ill wife, married Cindy who helped get his career in office, and who refuses to reveal twenty years of tax returns. This is important because McCain has a history of accepting money (BCCI) and was part of the Keating 5. He also maintains a strong relationship with lobbyists, proven by the fact that 5 lobbyists were recently let go by his campaign. And the lobbyists stuck with him when his presidential campaign was floundering.

What's that saying? Follow the money!

3. I disagree with a few of the things you said about war criminals. I believe you said Kerry and others didn't want to confront the fact hat by killing in those wars they (the people who serve) are war criminals. I think you're tip-toeing on that line there. The people who serve are there because they were lied to. They believe those people represented grave danger to our country. I think it comes close to crossing a line when it sounds like you're blaming the soldiers instead of the leadership. It's a line I myself won't cross. The troops were not to blame for Vietnam and the troops were not to blame for Iraq. HOWEVER, the fact is that some individual soldiers DO cross the line in war: they rape, they torture, they shoot weaponless people in the back, etc... Those individual soldiers have committed war crimes. But I would never use a blanket statement against all of them.

4. Regarding your statements on Kerry in 2004. It's an old argument (discussion) so I will simply remind you and everyone that John Kerry actually fought back that attack a few months prior to August. However, when August came, he didn't have the financial resources to create commercials and fight back that way. So he went to his fellow veterans. Within 10 days of the attack in August NUMEROUS articles had been written that complete dispelled the words that the liars were saying. However, you have the corrupt media to thank for the 3 additional months promoting and protecting those swift-boat-liars-for-Bush.

I have to admit that I'm sort of tired of watching people insist that Kerry did nothing when in fact he did. He had his military record posted on his blog. He answered the questions they asked. He had everyone who was on that boat with him go before the media and tell them what happened from a personal prospective.

What I see is a refusal on 1/2 the Democratic side for people to admit the fact that John Kerry and John Edwards were victims of the media. I think it's easier to just blame the victim.

Well, in this case, the victim did not have an open mic at CNN or anywhere. Take a look at Dan Rather and what happened to him when he told the truth about Bush. Take a look at everyone who worked on that story: they were fired. They were smeared in the media. They lost their own credibility. And they made it harder for anyone involved in that story against Bush to get a job any where else. They were blacklisted.

So there you have a comparison right there. Those that went with Bush and the Republican LIES kept their job and were not blacklisted. Those who continued to keep the liars in the limelight were safe. Those who told the truth got the "Rather" treatment.

So I am politely asking you to not perpetuate the spin that Kerry didn't fight back or didn't fight back effectively. The POWER behind all that was the White House, The MEDIA, and the MONEY-MEN. And we've noted for the last 4 years how many things the media HID while they revealed b.s. Republican spin. So I think it's time that we stop blaming the people who were powerless against a corrupt infrastructure-- a HUGE and powerful network!

Because it still boils down to one good man (or two if you count Edwards) vs the infrastructure in the White House and their vast connections to the media.

(SPEAKING OF MEDIA: READ DIANNE'S FRONT PAGE STORY! It's excellent! And it should be spread far and wide! Please don't forget to comment on the front page too. A lot of hard work goes into creating the home page articles and the open thread articles.)

Speaking of front page articles... if you can't post on the front page, then email me and I'll check to see what's up. Last we looked everyone had posting 'rights' on the front page. It is quirky though. Sometimes it doesn't open up the comment box over there, but if that happens, I just sign in on the open thread and then switch to there. (Cookies have to be enabled though.)

Also, I think they finally 'approved' the homepage so you don't get that funky site warning any longer. (Or I'm in a different browser window and don't get it.)

Back from lecturing in Denver...

Good to see that McCain FINALLY threw Hagee under the bus. Now, how about Parsley? If not, I've written a campaign slogan for him:

McCain-Parsley 2008: A war to end all wars, and human life itself.

Every time that I think our side is out of control, or has gone too far, I only need to spend a few moments following the other side. Is that entire movement suffering from pre-senile dementia?

AP: McCain appears cancer-free, healthy
71-year-old three-time cancer survivor in good shape, records indicate

FOUNTAIN HILLS, Ariz. - Three-time melanoma survivor John McCain appears cancer-free, has a strong heart and is in otherwise general good health, according to eight years of medical records reviewed by The Associated Press.

The Republican presidential nominee-in-waiting remains at risk for developing new skin cancers, and gets a thorough check by a Mayo Clinic dermatologist every few months.

“I do not see any worrisome lesions,” Dr. Suzanne Connolly concluded after McCain’s most recent exam, on May 12.

more...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24789774/

Again, gee willikers, I are shocked!

Anyone bother to ask about his psychological condition?

Look away, look away, look away, look awayyyyyy!

Can someone tell me....

Are our public servants required to take unannounced drug testing like most of us are when we apply for jobs? (OR for some people throughout their employment.)

They may be sparrow, but none of us have people on the inside that can actually take those results and have them re-written to be presented publically in the best possible light.

Fix-A-Flat

Regarding my point 4 from above.

Further proof of one guy vs the system is what happened to Edwards in 2008. He couldn't get unbiased media for anything! They creamed him and Elizabeth. And when they weren't creaming them, they ignored them.

It wasn't that he didn't fight back in 2008. IT's that the media controlled the storyline...just like they controlled the storyline in 2004-2002-2001-2000-1998-1996-1992, etc...You get the picture.

That's why we have to fight back against this corporate media. Ignoring them isn't always the right answer. Because a large segment of the population turns to them, because they're trying to stay informed, and they don't know that the media is complicit.

That's why it's important to take the truth to the people in whatever way we can: youtube, internet, network blogs, real life, protests, whatever...

monkey,

Regarding McCain's medical record...don't forget, this guy has known since 2000 that he would run again. So when he's gone to the doctor, he doesn't have to say anything except, "I FEEL GREAT!"

If he doesn't report it, they don't know it.

What is reported on his medical history is what he says he experiences. And if there is no report of irregular heart beats, odd cancerous looking spots, or extreme mood swings, then the doctor is not necessarily going to catch them.

Christy
I get what you say about "we live in a time of war crimes" - it's same thing I mean when I say "our foreign policy has been flawed for at least fifty years." We have supported dictators etc. - both parties complicit.

There are always things one doesn't say in politics. Another one is how the candidates talk about what tax cuts will or won't do - that is supposed to be a big Dem/Repub difference - tax and spend liberals vs fiscal conservatives (which Bush wasn't.)

Yet tax cuts are moot because of the devaluation of our dollar, which is tied to rising oil prices. It is not PC to make that connection and no one is discussing it.

There are many elephants and donkeys just walking around in the living room and no one sees them.

Now it's coming up that during wartime (or most anytime) alot of Americans want a warrior at the head (even though we have had chickenhawk after chickenhawk lately) - Obama could pick Jim Webb, who is a decent guy with conservative cred and from a belwether state.

Rumor has it Obama is headed to Puerto Rico with Oprah in tow. You heard it here. I heard it from someone in the Puerto Rico campaign who is from here. Any air miles or other stuff to donate I can put you in touch directly, anyone.

Need a slam bam in Puerto Rico which has more delegates than half the states in the US, for some godforsaken reason.

We don't have intermittent drug tests where I work.

Oregon grape.

Sparrow
I think the media didn't want Edwards because he's pro labor.

Most red states are right to work states.

NMP said: "There are many elephants and donkeys just walking around in the living room and no one sees them."

Bullsear, Catnip! That there is the basic sentiment that has been banging around in my head for daze uncounted, from my left year to the other, and everything in between, which has amounted to a Hole Lot of Nothing.

Make sense, not war.

Sparrow, I did not say Kerry didn't fight back, I said he was ineffective at countering the swiiftboaters because he could not figure out a way to speak the truth about what happened there without directly breaking an unwritten rule in our politics. Never admit you are guilty because we are ALLL guilty.

How do you explain it was morally wrong, a crime of enourmous proportions and then say 'Support our troops' in the same breath? That exact conudrum is why EVERY democrat has appeared spineless on Iraq, because we are all unwilling to touch up against that one taboo of admitting what we did was a crime. One we will never even be punished for.

Do you know why it is taboo? Not because we will ever be punished, because we are ASHAMED of what happened there.

And as far as me 'blaming the soldiers' or atleast toeing that line.... At some point we are ALLLLLLL responsible for what we are, what we were involved in, and who we are now. Just because you 'were following orders' does not absolve your personal responsibility of being involved in killings that can not be justified.

Following orders was the same excuse the Nazis gave, and it was not acceptable then. It is still not acceptable. Not for the lowest private, not for the officers, and the Commander and Chief certainly can not use it as an excuse.

Our soldiers are suppossed to follow orders, but they are also suppossed to REFUSE any unlawful or immoral order... How many times do they actually refuse? And if they did start refusing, there would be no one left to fight Iraqis. Our soldiers know best of all these people living in huts are not a threat to our country, yet still the war goes on. At what point are they responsible for the war they are freaking fighting?

The war in Vietnam was a war crime, starting from the first orders to bomb and the lies to justify it. Iraq was too, there is simply no denying the entire act itself is a CRIME and everyone involved in it is tainted.

Am I blaming the soldiers for war crimes in Vietnam? You damn right I am. I was raised listening to them brag about their crimes. Yet I am suppossed to shut up about it, because our poor poor soldiers might get their wittle feelings hurt.

Now that I think about it... I am FURIOUS about Vietnam. I mean really... just thinking about it makes me want to go take a shower and scrub my skin off.

A war crime happened then, one is happening now, and the main reason it can not be stopped, will not be stopped, is because of this taboo that says if we say it is a crime, we can not possibly be 'supporting our troops'.

And we have to be seen as 'supporting our troops', even if supporting them means turning a blind eye to war crimes. Anything less than supporting them means your not a loyal American.

'Supporting our troops' has literally become equal too 'Aid and abet this war crime'. I have defended our soldiers time and time again, and for WHAT? To be ASHAMED of what they did? To be tainted by it myself?

Nope, nope, nope. Ain't gonna happen. I will NOT hand off another Vietnam to my kids the way Vietnam was handed off to us.

"Make sense, not war."

AMEN BROTHERMAN!

I am going to have that tattooed on my body somewhere.

Christy,

I have never heard a Vietnam vet bragging about what happened there. So I guess I can not discuss this with the same background you can.

Regarding the Iraq vets, I have heard many, many many of them who feel betrayed.

The people who feel betrayed understand their role in things. I would not call them war criminals. Same with the Vietnam vets whom I've met. They have their own demons--all vets have their own demons.

The ones who don't have their shameful feelings are probably the ones who you speak of.

I am not calling them war criminals. That title I reserve for the ones giving the orders.

Yet, we can not even call them what they are, unless we deal with the fact the soldiers were the hands doing the dirty deed.

I think our soldiers should go home. Yes, they have demons and they need to go home and come to terms with what they were used for. But, their shame and guilt can not be allowed to be suffered in silence this time. We can not let them hide it away and create yet ANOTHER taboo that keeps us engaged in future wars because we could never fully define what happened in these times.

OMG--Clinton 'camp' LEAKING to CNN that they're in talks for her to be the VP OR ELSE.... "There will be a quote--CIVIL WAR--within the Dem party."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mi-OdKbRwIA

"The ones who don't have their shameful feelings are probably the ones who you speak of. "

Oh, they had shameful feelings, just not where you normally would expect to find them.

I have literally heard brags about buying little girls on the battlefield, blowing up food storages, and planting mines in rice paddies. Making ear necklaces, sniping civillians. My uncle had a mason jar of TEETH in his trunk we were never allowed to touch.

But it wasn't until I said 'Hey, isn't that immoral and a crime?' That is when all the sudden we were not suppossed to talk about Vietnam. All the sudden, I was the offensive one.

And who in the hell was I to DARE question what was done for me, in my name, for MY FREEDOM...?

I try very hard to be respectful of my elders, but on the subject of Vietnam, I have to say, what happened, what was allowed to happen, what yall handed off to us... disgusts me so bad I don't even know how to articulate it without being totally disrespectful.

I am sick Of Iraq, and I am sick of Vietnam, but mostly I am sick of this countrys inability to deal with either of them in any kind of a way that makes sense.

I am sick of being told I should be ashamed of saying something while people brag about the medals they recieved killing people for no damn reason at all.

I love our soldiers, but if it were legal to say it, I would tell every single one of them to put down their guns. Abandon their posts. REFUSE TO FIGHT.

If it were legal to say it, I would.

May 23, 2008 11:10 AM
Christy said:

"I think our soldiers should go home. Yes, they have demons and they need to go home and come to terms with what they were used for. But, their shame and guilt can not be allowed to be suffered in silence this time. We can not let them hide it away and create yet ANOTHER taboo that keeps us engaged in future wars because we could never fully define what happened in these times."

~~~

Christy--exactly RIGHT! That's why it's so important that IVAW and other Vets organizations have been right out here with us fighting to get the vets heard.

Just last week they had another winter soldier. Only one news organization reported on it though. (At least that's my understanding and I can dig up the link if need be.)

another threat from Hillary's people.

Sweet Lord, I hate Hillary Clinton.

Her need for attention has grown very desperate and even malicious. How embarrassing for her. The depth of her hubris is simply stunning.

She had a great legacy once. What a waste.

Obama now only needs 57 delegates to put him over the top. If the rules are not changed on 5/31, then he would have it.

Polls show him moving up even with the issue still undecided. He's gained about 10 points overall nationally with poll averages in head to head matches against Clinton, whereas they were neck and neck for a long time.

He's moving up on McCain in states Clinton had an advantage and the spread between Clinton and Obama in such states is closing. Example is Pennsylvania. Imagine the dynamics change if he actually campaigned more in places like Michigan, Florida and Puerto Rico now.

Word is it's Bill Clinton who wants the VP slot for Hillary, so she would have a shot at it later or power could be wielded from behind, Cheney style.

CHANGE means exactly that. I support CHANGE. The Democratic party has been out of power for two terms, for the most part. There is no reason to return to the type of moderate Democrat that allowed us to lose the Senate, House and possibly the Presidency (Clinton's fiasco didn't help Gore in 2000) in the first place.

Pragmatically, to win, it might be good for Obama to select someone like Webb (I see opponents are already dredging up "dirt" on him - that he was sexist or something), given his background.

Idealistically, I agree with Christy about the immorality of the whole Vietnam quagmire and I don't think there is a way to justifythe Vietnam war. What I was taught was that fighting there might stop the spread of Communism. It was called the "domino theory."

Even in high school, another girl and I debated that, and our position was that Russia (Stalinist) and China (Maoist) did not pose a monolithic threat. Even my dad, a WW2 vet, felt that the N and S Vietnamese really didn't have much allegiance to Communism or Capitalism per se, but that they would support whoever would feed them. (It makes me think of some poor regions in the US of A!)

It's the same reason the Myanmar government doesn't want aid in - the people might realize it's coming form outside. (I was in Myanmar 10 years ago and glad aid is going to get in at all!)

I don't want him to pick Webb if only because I strongly feel we need to keep as many "D's" in the Senate as possible.

I still like Wes Clark even if he's a Hillary supporter, he works his heart out for vets, and he worked his heart out for Kerry and the 2006 candidates.

Put her on the ticket. She'd likely prove a nightmare, but not having her on the ticket will lead to a seriously divided party.

Can't Hillary drop out already?

She is truly destroying the Democrats and turning the country into a one-party dictatorship. And she's happy to do it.

(And if the Democrats can't get in the White House this year, even after all the W blunders, they don't deserve to exist.)

In the meantime, I will be dropping some peace banners on the I-10 freeway in San Gabriel Valley this Memorial Day, on behalf of CODEPINK. (I was at Jodie Evans' house yesterday helping make some of those peace banners, and was busy spreading the word about DCP and Karen.) Even at CODEPINK, people were talking about IVAW and other antiwar veterans groups, and how the MSM ignores them.

NMP

CHANGE means exactly that. I support CHANGE. The Democratic party has been out of power for two terms, for the most part. There is no reason to return to the type of moderate Democrat that allowed us to lose the Senate, House and possibly the Presidency (Clinton's fiasco didn't help Gore in 2000) in the first place.

Thank you.

Stay "moderate" and the Democrats deserve to go the way of the UK Labours, who are being pummeled by both the Tories and the Lib Dems.

I do wish the Lib Dems become the standard bearers for the left in the UK, and the Labour go away forever. After the Blair and Brown governments, the Labours have lost any reason to exist.

My opinion on Hillary as VP for what it's worth.

Hillary shouldn't want it or ask for it. If she's a VP, she will be a figure head VP and will not get to be in charge or have any kind of power.

I don't think Hillary wants to be a figure head. I think she's fighting for a real leadership position, such as Harry Reid's job. (However, I also think given how hard Kerry has worked for Obama and also creating different legislations with Obama, I believe Kerry has a strong case for taking over Reid's job.)

ANCHORAGE, Alaska - America's wildlife refuges are so short of money that one-third have no staff, boardwalks and buildings are in disrepair, and drug dealers are using them to grow marijuana and make methamphetamine, a group pushing for more funding says.

"Without adequate funding, we are jeopardizing some of the world's most spectacular wildlife and wild lands," said Evan Hirsche, president of the National Wildlife Refuge Association and chairman of the Cooperative Alliance for Refuge Enhancement.

The cooperative said in a report released Thursday to Congress that the nation's 548 refuges and the 100 million-acre National Wildlife Refuge System — about the size of California — is underfunded by 43 percent. The refuge system needs at least $765 million a year but is receiving only $434 million, the report says.

A decrease in law enforcement has left the refuges vulnerable to criminal activity, including prostitution, torched cars and illegal immigrant camps along the Potomac River in suburban Washington, D.C.; gay sex hookups in South Carolina and Alabama; methamphetamine labs in Nevada; and pot growing operations in Washington state.

"The refuge system has been underfunded for years but it has really mushroomed in the past several," Hirsche said.

more...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24788485/

America the beautiful, add it to the list of things destroyed by the Bush administration.

monkey

That report is from Alaska... and speaking of Alaska, shove 'em.

Alaska is the most Republican state in the union, because the oil dividend has proven highly addictive, and nobody cares about the pristine environment they live in. And the oil dividend was actually a Democratic idea (no Republican wanted to give money away to the masses), but everyone thanks the Republicans for pushing on with more oil exploration.

So you'd like to switch your order to the Baked Alaska then, I'm guessing?

A thought as we head into what I hope will be a great Memorial Day Weekend for you and your family: put aside the partisan politics, and on this solemn holiday, no matter what we think of this war policy in Iraq, let's keep the men and women who serve our country in our hearts and in our prayers every day.

Hope that since Vietnam we really have learned a lesson of how to separate the war from the warrior.

And when you reflect on the meaning of service and sacrifice and love of country, consider the young veteran who will give our Democratic radio address this weekend -- John Boccieri.

John's an Iraq War veteran running for Congress in Ohio, and he summons all our citizens to keep our promise to our veterans.

You can listen on the radio this weekend, or go to his site and listen to it now:

http://www.johnforcongress.com

Thank you and have a great holiday weekend,
John Kerry

The GOP thugs swiftboated JK mercilessly in 2004, The Democrats could have a field day with McCain.

JOHN MCCAIN'S ROLE IN THE USS FORRESTAL FIRE THAT LEFT 168 DEAD

http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/forum.cgi?noframes;read=119707

http://judicial-inc.biz/82jjohn_mccain_and_the_uss_forresta.htm

Lieberman's Step-Son: I'm Voting For Obama

There's one less Democrat listening to Sen. Joe Lieberman. Rabbi Ethan Tucker, the senator's step son, offered up his opinion on the difficulties facing Obama in reaching out to the Jewish community:

Tucker, 32, the biological son of Lieberman's wife, Hadassah, opines that an age split is apparent within the Jewish community in attitudes about Obama (as has also been shown in the overall Democratic constituency). Tucker, as paraphrased by reporter Jodi Kantor, asserts that younger Jews "have grown up in diverse settings and are therefore less likely to be troubled by Mr. Obama's associations than their elders."
So where does Rabbi Tucker fall on Obama, whose foreign policy bona fides were bashed by his stepfather in a recent editorial? Actually, he's backing Obama. Apparently, Obama's associations aren't a problem for him:

"Rabbi Tucker said he had given money to Mr. Obama and would vote for him in the fall. 'If association was the litmus test of identity, everyone would be a hopeless mishmash of confusion, or you'd have no friends,' he said."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/23/liebermans-step-son-im-vo_n_103293.html

McCain Misses 60% Of Senate Votes, More Than Any Other Senator

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2008/05/mccain_leads_in_missed_votes.html

So, was Hillary saying that she expected one of her "core" voters to take a shot at Obama?

So, was Hillary saying that she expected one of her "core" voters to take a shot at Obama?

Disgusting isn't it?

And, for the record, this was not the first time that the Clinton campaign has compared Obama to a Kennedy, in the assassination context. It also happened early on, after Obama was endorsed by Caroline Kennedy – and after, I believe (correct me if I’m wrong), Caroline favorably compared Barak’s charisma to her father’s.

This person is a fighter, in the same way that Hitler, in his bunker to the very end, was a fighter. Spare us such fighters.

Given that this person's campaign has come down to an argument of "uneducated white people like me", and our history of exactly those kinds of people murdering powerful black leaders, like Medger Evers and Martin Luther King, this remark must be considered utterly beyond the pale. There can no excusing it away.

Wow.

She has lost her mind.

Comparing her to Hitler really ticks me off--I'm sorry!

Call her a barn dog.

Call her a rabid barn dog.

Call her a loose canon.

Call her power-hungry.

But don't compare her to Hitler when all of us here know that she's never come close to Hitler's misdeeds. And speaking for myself, I've lost 2/3rds of my family members in Hitler's vendetta across Europe. So, it really is a punch in my stomach to see a comparison like that.

Obama and Oprah need to rock Puerto Rico.
Obama needs 57 delegates before 5/31.
No changes in the math.
Done with status quo.
On to Change.
Victory.

Her stubborness, and will to power, is comparable. But perhaps I mispoke, and should have instead compared her to Mussolini.

And, I'm sorry, but given America's tragic racial history, and the history of white trash repeatedly murdering black leaders, men far better than they could ever hope to be, and her deliberate attempt to court that vote...if the shoe fits...

amidst all the talk of negativity .. Hitler, assassinations etc .. I just bought this & my heart has lifted

Here is why I needed to buy this positive poster (which is also a donation) immediately (see video).

see also http://www.silencedmajority.blogs.com
http://www.baracklikeme.blogspot.com

The Olbermann diary at DKos has way over 2000 comments ..

Matthew,

I'm sorry for speaking up. I feel what I feel.

But this whole primary has completely unhinged me--and maybe everyone--including Hillary!

I don't know. I just know that I think both Hillary supporters and Obama supporters are upping the ante past the point of no return.

I sure as hell don't want a McCain pResidency. And the more this battle goes on, the more I'm afraid it's going to happen.

Given what Hillary said today, I think she needs a time out! Period! She WAS over the top with her comment, even though I don't believe it reaches to the Hitler realm. But she needs to truly sit down and think before she acts and speaks as of right now. Because if her goal was to achieve the VP or P or Senate Leader or anything, her words at this point are hurting her own cause. Right now, she is her own worst enemy.

WEll I am going to call South Dakotans because I worked for McCarthy and McGovern there in my youth and lived there from ages 4-26. I got 2 degrees from University of SD. Surely I might be able to convince some young people to support Obama or talk to some women my age.

With regard to Foreign Affairs - opinion piece in today's Age:

US failure on energy policy to cost dearly
Thomas Friedman
May 24, 2008
THERE has been much debate in this campaign about which of our enemies the next US president should deign to talk to. The real story, the next president may discover, though, is how few countries are waiting around for us to call. It is hard to remember a time when more shifts in the global balance of power are happening at once — with so few in America's favour.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/opinion/thomas-friedman/2008/05/23/1211183102328.html

Surely I might be able to convince some young people to support Obama or talk to some women my age.

Good Luck, grab some for me, NMP

I am constanstly reminded of what I thought the day Senator Clinton announced she was a candidate for president... that absolutely nothing good could come from it... and I stick by that.

But I never imagined all this.

Nightmare on the Misery Train

Can Oncall prescribe an entire blog circle valium? You people sound as freaked out as I feel.

If I have to watch this trainwreck much longer I may start babbling uncontrollably while sticking red hot forks into my own eyeballs.

I'm beside myself waiting to see more on Barack Obama's Puerto Rico appearance - on his site on the Puerto Rico section I could see it was at a main square in Old San Juan. Hoping for billowing flags and reggaeton. He's an ex-islander who should have something distinct to offer.

I can't find anything man - his site finally has Barack in front of a podium at some Vet event in PR but nothing exciting.

Then, the Christian Broadcasting Network sent a reporter and his report was pretty interesting:

http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/375295.aspx

See the video. I wish I was in Puerto Rico so I went to iTunes to listen to some reggaeton.

Right now, there are 86 pledged delegates remaining and approximately 206 superdelegates.

Senator Obama needs 56 or Nineteen Percent (19%) of those remaining to clinch the nomination by June. Senator Clinton needs 242.5 or Eighty-three Percent (83%) of those remaining.

There are state conventions in Alaska and Wyoming today - that can mean more delegates.

Nedra Pickler has finally written a good article:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080524/ap_on_el_pr/obama_s_team;_ylt=ArJp71DOTi.TLT9pJwhKCviyFz4D

It actually provides new information, such as that Obama operatives were trained by Gephart and Daeschle people, whereas Clinton operatives are out of NY and DC.

Decent people. Maybe "journalists" like Pickler will learn something this year. Maybe Adam Nagourney will be next.

I know nothing about tv (except from blogs, YouTube etc) but I know my op-edders, NPRers (like Moira Liason, Don Gagne etc) and print pundits. I am now an Olbermann fan (on my computer) and of course Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert.

Air America drives me up the wall (my husband listens to it in his car) - too much screaming and commercials.

Portland via Kayak

NMP

WEll I am going to call South Dakotans because I worked for McCarthy and McGovern there in my youth and lived there from ages 4-26. I got 2 degrees from University of SD. Surely I might be able to convince some young people to support Obama or talk to some women my age.

I hope you don't end up talking to uncooperative husbands, like you did in WV.

I can tell you this: both my parents are registered Republicans, though only my mother votes regularly (and she usually votes with the Democrats). Nevertheless, the RNC, the various candidates, and conservative action papers are ALL targeting my father only (and he rarely votes), figuring that my mother, as a woman, is never supposed to speak up.

These are very strange people. My mother will vote even more Democratic as a result, though she's too lazy to change her registration. And I won't push her to change either, as the Democrats have traditionally had no interest in representing my city and district, though even that may be changing this year.

new thread

NMP

Agreed about too many screams on Air America Radio - especially on Randi Rhodes. Though we agree that Rachel Maddow is great. :) Dyke Power!

I also like Stephanie Miller, even though she's not part of the AAR lineup (my affiliate carries her anyway). I did notice that due to protests by conservative transgender women (and there are tons of them), Miller no longer describes Mann Coulter as trans.

There are tons of transgender conservative women? Do they also have transplants to have additional neocon cells in their brain or something? What is their goal? To be more like Anita Bryant?

Watch her get a pie in the face. "Well at least it's a fruit pie."

"Let's pray for her."